As always, this man knows what he is talking about.

But it's such a waste of fabric!

...you might actually be able to make an argument from that, but I think its illegal to cut up and sew or wear an American flag.

While flag burning to demonstrate your hatred is reprehensible, people should have the liberty to do so. This all goes back to freedom of speech and as the saying goes "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.".

As a proponent of 'progression of intellectual and cultural development', you're embarrassing me. I wonder what it is that causes so many humans to be so self loathing.

As a self-observing, sapient entity, I find humans are about the only thing worth my time.

Edit: Screw opinions.

Post has been edited 2 time(s), last time on Sep 6 2011, 10:09 pm by Tuxedo-Templar.

How very centrist of you.

On a comparison of what we're capable of and what we're actually accomplishing, I am disgusted.

Allow me to illustrate. The computer control system that landed people on the moon isn't as powerful as a current day mobile phone. Our strides in computing are actually quite remarkable, and our lust for miniaturization of our computers certainly makes something from Star Trek, where ships house giant computers, a fairly silly prediction.

But our development of science is completely outpaced by our culture.

Many humans are arrogant, ignorant, and uneducated fiends. There seems to be a great rift between the elite, our scientists and engineers, and our general populace. The spectrum of intellect is simply staggering, humans range from only marginally smarter than dolphins to being able to understand the fundamental way our Universe works. So while we have eliminated smallpox and rinderpest, we are still bickering over whether evolution, one of the most supported scientific theories, should be taught in our schools because a religious text claims otherwise.

We crave money and power; fueling the capitalist regime with great intensity. As a result, many do things in pursuit of both- but neither is a measure of true progress. Those who cannot beat the system and become the elite minds instead have them squandered. Allow me to illustrate using one subject I am familiar with: mathematics.

Mathematics training, from day 1, is based solely on memorization and quick draw from that memory. Before children are taught what numbers are, they are taught what 1 + 1 is. Why is left out of the equation entirely, as it is not deemed necessary to know why numbers do what they do. By the time a child has reached his teenage years, and finishes his formal education of arithmetic, he may know that a circle has an area of 2π, but he does not quite know why, nor does he know why 0.999… = 1. He begins his algebra training and fails to see its purpose, or struggles with its complications. We force memorization of the quadratic formula, but do not explain it nor the reasoning behind the FOIL method.

If he is lucky, he will be able to intuitively deduce these reasons from brute intelligence alone, and get a glimpse into the gears behind mathematics. He will be deemed good at mathematics, and put in accelerated classes to help "challenge" him. Instead, only his ability to memorize quickly is challenged. HIs previous insight into mathematics will become more and more convoluted as he may no longer rely on his intelligence alone. Those who do have a superior level of intellect beyond this accelerated level may rise to the top, and feel a good grasp on what they know.

This too, can only go so far, before their own abilities become far too taxed by the increased demand of a college-level accelerated course. Where others of his stature suddenly realize how hard mathematics can be. He may become a scientist or an engineer. But he will never become an accomplished mathematician. He is not good at mathematics. He does not understand it.

This reliance on intelligence only holds us back. Only those students who begin at the bottom rung, play with the gears, and learn how they work and slowly build on understanding- those individuals that need not memorize, because they know the why- those people are the mathematicians. However, this sort of pursuit is profitless. It takes far more time and effort to teach the why instead of the how. Time is money spent on a generation of people that will not need these skills. Memorization will destroy the person, but will reward the company.

In this, humanity has created a parasite. It acts as a dead-weight and enhances our ignorance. We are not taught to think, we are taught to obey. Furthermore, we become bigoted and hateful due to ignorance.

It is in this sense that humanity has disgraced itself. We have unleashed devastating weapons in our only biosphere. One of our greatest accomplishments was not for the betterment of us, but to show one country's superiority over another.

For shame.

Post has been edited 2 time(s), last time on Sep 7 2011, 3:49 am by Sacrieur.

Well the wording on freedom of speech means anything that comes out of your mouth is not punished. However it doesn't let you do things not associated with speech. So i would say it doesn't cover it... but anything older than 200 - 300 years becomes outdated such as the bible which seemed like a masterpiece than seems stupid now (only some parts of it) for e.g. kain being marked "black" which states that black people are bad. That and your not allowed to stop your "seed" from going to waste; meaning contraceptives and condoms are banned by the bible.

First off, the area of a circle is pi times the radius squared. Let's keep that straight. I realize you were simply trying to illustrate that we might know the formula pi*r^2, but not know where it comes from, but had to set that straight before I got into anything.

Secondly, I'll address the point of your story:
Legalizing flag burning is an effort in the pursuit of teaching thinking and independence. It's an effort to allow people to speak their mind through symbolism, even though it has a derogatory and disrespectful meaning towards the country which the flag symbolizes.

Thats because the purpose of the government is not to give every citizen higher education; it is simply required to educate its people to a practical standard of functionality in which every citizen knows enough to read, write, and do enough arithmetic to be a competent citizen. The deeper issue here isn't that people should strive to be the best they can be; it's the limits we place on government to not infringe our rights. As much as it would be great if everyone could design their own computer or airplane or discover the reconciling equation between gravity and quantum mechanics, the government cannot require this of us because, as silly as it sounds, if we so choose to be ignorant we must be allowed that right. The basic education required by the american government is an infringement upon our rights, but one we all tolerate because of the extremely high practicality of it. Besides, not everyone needs to know that .999... = 1; that's equivelent to spelling the word "armor" as "armour"; same exact thing, different representation. The government shouldn't require everyone to know what you think is important, but rather a set of knowledge agreed upon by congress.

As for your problems with countries themselves; I fully support the division of people into separate, independent countries. Much like the american federal government, the division of power between the state and federal levels, the executive, legislative, and judicial branches, helps keep things fair, balanced, and stops any single person or group from going power crazy. Can you imagine if the world was united under a single government which decided that every citizen had to have a bar code branded on their arm, or something else just as invasive? Who would keep this massive government in check? Wouldn't you be annoyed that you have to send your medical bill all the way to some place halfway across the planet just to get your medicare to pay up? And when they don't, are you gonna blow hundreds of dollars to fly a plane halfway around the world to go get it sorted out? We already have these sorts of problems in the United States, and every other non-world-sized country.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Sep 7 2011, 10:00 pm by Vrael.

I accidentally pressed no but i meant to say yes...

This argument actually brings up an interesting point that I once heard...

If everyone goes for a super high college degree, then nobody would have any farms. (Or similar professions, I realize you can get one of those... farming degrees?)

Not EVERYONE can have a meaningful college degree.

Wow, really? You thought that was interesting?

Seems kind of obvious. Capitalist societies are set up in such a way that there must be 'haves' and 'have nots'. This extends to all resources, including education.

All economic systems are simply ways of distributing scarce resources. Under capitalism it is judged that those who put in effort and skill should be rewarded more than those who don't. Problems arise when not everyone has the same opportunities to learn skills or to apply the skills/effort that they are capable of applying.

Everyone knows congress is great at making good decisions based on science and reason.

People don't need to know number theory, no, but I'm illustrating a huge problem of the monetary system. We are failing since most blindly accept that it is just the way things are and should be.



But capitalism rewards exploitation and larger control. It does reward the most skilled for the position. People are rewarded for grappling boring and often monotonous work- despite its destructive nature. Such work kills energy, enthusiasm, and creativity. I do not argue that one should not hire the engineer who does not truly understand math if he is the better worker. By all means, that is the logical choice.

I insult the system to proposing such standards, and humanity for accepting it.

Capitalism was a nice development for awhile. It helped raise standard of living, personal liberty, and scientific research. However, it has now overstayed its welcome. It's the reason we are using gasoline powered cars instead of the incredibly more frugal and zero-emission hydrogen fuel cells. This is an example of how it's holding us back.

I do not like divisions, nor do I support a single government in control. Both are a bad idea. One pulls apart global consciousness and the other destroys individual recognition and freedom. But, needless to say, so long as money exists, so must a government to regulate it.

When you say that selling gasoline powered cars is a bad thing, you are also not taking into consideration the other side.
Capitalism has increased the development of computers and software much faster than a communist government would i.e. the decrease in size of digital devices, and the increase in speed and processing power. I think the problem right now, is that hydrogen fuel cell cars are still expensive to build. Why would I buy a car that's good for the environment if I can't afford one. Gas is still at a reasonable price, and the cars are 1/5 the cost. In a socialist government, everyone would just ride a bicycle because they wouldnt be able to afford to make hydrogen cars.

I'll ignore the false dichotomy.

You did well explaining the reasons why in a monetary society buying a hydrogen powered car makes little sense, but they only strengthen my criticisms.

I'll explain this to you in Starcraft terms.

Player 1 starts out building 10 SCV's a refinery, and begins teching to battlecruisers.

Player 2 decides to expand and build more SCV's first, although SCV's are a much lower tech, and probably not as cool to drive as a battlecruiser, they are cost effective. Minerals are an exhaustable resource, but SCV's help increase production rates, giving player 2 a much better economy.


Gas cars are cost effective, although they aren't as good in the long run as a hydrogen fuel cell car, there are 1000 times as many of them as there are hydrogen cars, once hydrogen cars become cost effective, they will slowly increase replacing those cruddy old cars, that used to be the coolest tech.


by the way this has nothing to do with flag burning.

Good point but made a bit too dramatic. The education system is fine-tuned for capitalism.

Should we have the right to burn flags? Of course! We have the right to do a lot of things we shouldn't do out of common sense!

We strive for scientific progress as a society and claim that we're making a better world with our advancements. It is true that some technological breakthroughs improved the lives of those who have them, but due to the capitalist system we've set up, these aids are available to the 1st world only at the expense of the 3rd world. We used to own slaves officially to supply us with the goods we consume, now we all own them unofficially. However, we cannot just tell people to consume less - the limits would be impossible to define and even if we did define them, it would be a forceful, artificial solution. What we need is a spiritual awakening; not in a religious sense but in a sense of raising a generation of people with deeper, humane values to replace the ones we foster now. To be less dependent on society, governments and other people yet have the kindness and the strength not to be swayed. We need a generation of people that don't idolize science and material profit but focus on their inner beings instead. Happiness does not depend on how scientifically or financially powerful your society is - a lot of satisfied individuals live in relative poverty; their communities do not cherish the same values we do. If we manage to improve the inner world of the average western individual, a significant positive change to the world can be made.

@Sacrieur

Capitalism has its flaws, but is there a better economic system available that is also practical?


Hmm, should we just start a topic about capitalism?

I find it kind of amusing how the topic is being derailed into an argument about capitalism in general. Regardless, I guess I'll share my two cents on flag burning:

Who cares? I believe everyone else covered the free speech argument so instead I'll just go ranting on about how flag burning being disrespectful is a weak argument. Respect ended back when democracy started. All the time we've got right wing nuts calling liberals parasites and communists and all the time we've got Liberals calling conservatives fascists. Respect doesn't exist, end of discussion. And even better, I want everyone to picture this:

Right now someone is masturbating to superman. Irrelevent? No, for Superman too is a symbol, he's a symbol for all that's good. And I don't know about you, but I'd say that masturbating to the symbol of everything that's good is far more disrespectful than burning a flag that represents a country run by incompetent politicians voted in through incompetent voters.

If rule thirty four can exist, why the hell can't burning flags? If I have to endure someone masturbating to my favourite characters, to symbols that I look up to, then I think the everyone else should endure me burning their flags that represents their countries. Especially if their countries treat me like dirt. No one listens to words, they watch for actions. And I think burning a flag will better show my misery than a bit of wailing.

Strange, I suddenly want to burn a flag now.

That is a pretty odd argument, and I'm pretty sure rule 34 is confined to just the internet, and is humor, but that doesn't mean the porn actually doesn't exist.